I’m going to tell you what this article actually is: a post about how to ruin a 26-year-old reputation (both personal and corporate) in 26 minutes. A post about how to lose control by giving in to improvisation and emotions, ultimately turning a public appearance into a real battleground. And, although moral lessons are usually left until the end, I’ll give you a spoiler right now: any spokesperson must prepare and carefully consider every statement in detail, and have the tools to maintain control (or regain it if they’ve lost it). Otherwise, their image will be in tatters, directly impacting the corporate reputation.

A corporate reputation is built slowly (very slowly), over years and decades, through strategic decisions and, above all, leadership based on credibility and consistency, but it can be destroyed in an instant: a single public statement made without an awareness of the role you represent and without proper preparation is enough to jeopardise decades of reputational capital. And, I think we can all agree, the press conference on 12 May by Florentino Pérez, the (still) president of Real Madrid, is an extraordinary example of this.

So, let’s take a look at the three key points that stood out during this press conference and the lessons we can learn from each of them.

When the spokesperson ceases to represent the institution

One of the basic principles of spokesperson training is that anyone speaking in public must be clear that they represent an organisation, its corporate culture and values, and that they represent these above and beyond themselves. In other words, above and beyond the spokesperson themselves. Spokesperson roles are individual, yes, but above all, they are institutional.

However, for much of the press conference, Florentino Pérez moved away from institutional matters and onto a personal level: the press conference ceased to be a corporate explanation of the club’s future and instead became a response to personal rumours, media criticism and conflicts external to the club he represents. And this loss of control had a direct impact in three areas: firstly, on the message, which ceased to be perceived as leadership and began to be perceived as a reaction; secondly, on the image of the executive himself; and thirdly, on the image of the company itself.

And that was exactly what happened.

The five lessons learnt:

1. Don’t speak without training first
2. Don’t lose sight of the main message
3. Don’t improvise
4. Don’t talk more than necessary
5. Don’t overlook non-verbal communication

The most dangerous mistake: speaking from a place of hurt

Let us always remember that the spokesperson’s emotional tone has as much, if not more, influence than the content of the message. This aspect marks a critical juncture in any public appearance: when the spokesperson ceases to steer and lead the conversation and begins to react to it and defend themselves personally.

In spokesperson training, there is one essential rule: you should never make a public statement driven by an emotional need for vindication or to settle scores, because when a spokesperson feels the need to deny something, explain themselves or seek revenge in public, they lose emotional control and their ability to exercise strategic control.

Corporate communication is not about winning debates or arguments. It is about leadership, and about demonstrating authority with confidence and transparency.

For this reason, one of the most sensitive aspects of the press conference was the constant personalisation of the conflict: naming journalists, accusing specific media outlets of orchestrating campaigns, or even using hyperbolic expressions such as “they’ll have to shoot me to get me out” are attitudes and elements that automatically shift the focus away from the institutional message and turn it into a personal conflict. And, in terms of reputation, this comes at a huge cost because the audience expects a calm, composed and controlled spokesperson who leads their statement with proportionality and reasoned arguments, especially in high-pressure situations. The spokesperson may be fundamentally right, but completely lose public support because of the manner in which they present their case, and that is one of the greatest risks in institutional communication: confusing firmness with aggression.

The five lessons learnt:

1. Do not get drawn into emotional arguments: do not react impulsively or speak out of anger
2. Do not use sarcasm or irony, nor display arrogance
3. Do not use a constantly defensive tone or threats
4. Confusing firmness with aggressiveness
5. Do not turn an official appearance into a settling of scores, nor adopt a victim mentality

When the spokesperson becomes the subject of the news

There is another fundamental rule regarding the role of the spokespersons in the field of corporate communication: the focus of the statement should never be the spokesperson. The protagonist should be the message, and the spokesperson, its messenger.

However, by the end of the press conference, the public debate was no longer centred on the elections at Real Madrid nor on the management of the club, but rather it centred exclusively on Florentino Pérez, his clashes with the press and the tone of his statements.

The ruling is clear from the perspective we are analysing: this shift in focus is one of the main indicators of communication failure. Because when public discourse strays from the strategic objective of the statement and focuses instead on the spokesperson’s behaviour, the organisation loses control of the narrative, with all that this entails for its reputation. And regaining that control often takes weeks, months or even years.

The five lessons learnt:

1. Don’t forget that you represent an institution
2. Don’t think that a reputation once established is indestructible
3. Do not make conflicts with journalists a personal matter or discredit the media
4. Do not ridicule uncomfortable questions or journalists because of their personal circumstances
5. Do not respond to provocations

Three key points and 15 lessons learned from a real-life example that highlight the pitfalls to avoid in public appearances, as they are exactly the kind of things any spokesperson should steer clear of.

A striking real-life example that illustrates how a business leader, accustomed to being in control and with three decades of reputation-building behind him, lost sight of the purpose of his appearance in the space of just a few minutes, and how this resulted in a complete loss of narrative control and emotional control. Because, beyond the political or sporting content of his statements, what is relevant from a corporate communications perspective is how a senior executive of an IBEX-listed company and a leading organisation such as Real Madrid lost the strategic focus of a speech that will take a long time to be forgotten.

That is why this is a prime example of how an institutional appearance can become a case study in poor media management. We must therefore always bear in mind one key principle: reputations can be destroyed in a matter of minutes – and almost always in front of a camera.

La entrada The case of Florentino Pérez: the three key factors in how to destroy 26 years of corporate reputation in 26 minutes se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

The recent digital upheaval caused by the organisation TetayTeta following a viral video has laid bare an unbridgeable rift. This is not a case of a strategic failure or a ‘communication error’; what has happened is, quite simply, that they have been caught red-handed, and it is this reality check that has triggered the crisis. When the actual aid is negligible compared to the publicity campaign, the problem is not that the message was poorly managed; it is the lie. It is the fundamental lack of consistency in organisations that, quite profitably, confuse marketing with ethics.

The trick of donating stands instead of cash

The transparency report from the organising company, Sport Life Ibérica, reveals that it allocated €264,967 to “charitable initiatives”, a figure it claims represents 20% of its net registration revenue. It sounds impeccable in a press release, but the small print analysed by El País hides the accounting sleight of hand: of the 36 beneficiary organisations, 23 received this aid in the form of the provision and assembly of stands at the event’s fair. To imagine a team of scientists trying to pay for reagents in a cancer laboratory with three square metres of advertising marquee and foam board counters is almost a joke. Valuing the space you manage yourself and counting it as a “donation” is not philanthropy; it is a commercial exchange disguised as aid. Financial transparency is the only antidote: if an initiative does not specify from the outset how much cash is going towards research, brands should not offer their support. Otherwise, they are not victims; they are complicit in an accounting sleight of hand.

The legal excuse for ethical deception

Faced with the runners’ outrage upon discovering they were funding a for-profit event, the organisers defended themselves by claiming it is “a sporting event with a social commitment, not a charity run”. Their aim, they say, is to promote exercise. They are right about one thing: their strategy is entirely legal. In Spain, there is no specific regulation governing charitable advertising and, as FACUA points out, the masterstroke is that not a single poster needs to use the word ‘charity’. The sea of pink and the ribbons do all the associative work implicitly in the consumer’s mind. However, under the Unfair Competition Act, a campaign is misleading if it presents information in a way that misleads the recipient, thereby altering their economic behaviour.

Women don’t pay a registration fee to play sport on a rainy Sunday; they do so because they firmly believe their money will go towards saving lives. Exploiting legal loopholes to rake in millions with the public’s emotional complicity is, quite simply, an ethical deception. This ‘pink capitalism’ also generates a dangerous anaesthetic effect: it stifles political demands and mobilisation by delegating the solution to consumer brands. Who do we ask to look after us – a brand or public institutions? Window-dressing solidarity privatises empathy, turning it into an indicator of advertising performance.

Four rules to ensure CSR is no longer just for show

For brands seeking genuine commitment and wishing to avoid the backlash of pinkwashing, the solution lies in taking action with radical honesty right from the outset of the project. We must focus on and demand transparency regarding the flow of funds: before signing, the CSR department must audit where the funds are going. Demand clauses stipulating the actual net percentage of cash that will reach the laboratories. If there is a lack of transparency, withdraw the sponsorship.

Swap large-scale events for local aid: large-scale events provide spectacular photos but dilute the impact of aid. It is far more transformative to work directly with grassroots organisations or independent foundations, fully funding a researcher’s salary or local equipment. The impact is direct, measurable and human.

Assess the consistency of the product: It is inconsistent to see highly processed food or cosmetics companies that are under scientific scrutiny sponsoring women’s health events. If your products are not suitable for someone whose immune system has been compromised by cancer treatment, you fail the ethical test. CSR starts within your own production chain.

Start showing solidarity within your own organisation: there is no point in funding external ‘pink tide’ initiatives if, behind closed doors, your work-life balance policies penalise female employees undergoing medical treatment or fail to support staff with sick relatives. Involving your workforce in the assessment of social projects fosters a genuine sense of pride that no amount of advertising can buy.

Show the impact, hide the logo: effective communication gives the floor to those at the heart of the story. Showcase the scientific progress you’ve funded or the families supported thanks to your direct cash transfers. When the facts speak for themselves, slogans become unnecessary and any suspicion of a mere facade naturally disappears.

The end of pink paint

This crisis of confidence is not directed at the thousands of citizens who are acting in the best of intentions. It is a warning to the management committees. Consumers have become more discerning; they know how to access transparency portals and are no longer satisfied with the colour of a T-shirt or with press releases drafted by public relations departments.

Companies face a very simple ethical dilemma: either they continue to spend their budget on tins of pink paint to hide the cracks in their corporate inconsistency, or they start investing that money in laying the foundations for genuine social impact of which they can be proud, without fear of being called to account.

La entrada The pink wave: the great accounting illusion behind the brands se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

The most notable example is the original Mad Men. Millennials learned about advertising from the impeccably dressed Don Draper, who pulls the strings of the industry in late 1960s New York. The series presents a Draper who does not hesitate to storm out of the room if his ideas are not to the client’s liking. More recent is the French series Call My Agent!, which shows the ins and outs of a Parisian talent agency struggling between ruin and success. This production satirises the eccentricity of the celebrities that ASK represents and portrays the ambition of executives who would do anything to maintain their position.

Fortunately, collaborating with external teams in communication in this case is much easier than it used to be. in communications in this case, it is much easier and (and less dramatic) than what is seen on screen. Below, I have compiled a few reflections on my day-to-day work with highly diverse teams at various agencies in different countries. This is not a list of best practices, much less a manual for being a good client, but simply a compilation of considerations that I personally find useful as a professional.

Leave your ego behind

Let the person who knows the most, has the most experience or is the most competent in a subject they deal with it is something that, in principle, falls under its own weight. However, sometimes we find ourselves resisting delegating, often guided by that little voice inside us that tells us we should manage it ourselves. “you should handle this yourself”, aka our ego.

Being aware of this bias is the first step toward eliminating it. Reaping the rewards of distributing tasks based on the skills and abilities of each member of the communication team—whether internal or external—is the second and final step.

Throughout my years in public relations, I have been extremely fortunate to work with fantastic external professionals, sometimes with more years of experience or greater knowledge of the local market than I have. During this time, recognizing my own strengths and those of others has brought me much professional joy, and I cannot recall a single occasion when I have regretted doing so.

Communication and business consultants

Public relations is not a separate entity but an extension of the business, and as such, it is essential that there be fluid dialogue between both parties. Scheduling regular meetings with regional directors or heads of other departments allows those of us responsible for designing and implementing the communication strategy to immerse ourselves in the challenges and objectives with first-hand information, providing an opportunity to ask questions and exchange ideas that enrich our work.

This also includes external communications teams. Setting aside a few hours a year to moderate the agency-business relationship and encourage open dialogue also serves to increase visibility of the value that public relations brings to the company as a whole.

Protect and manage your time with your agencies

Opening up conversations between the communications team and the rest of the business does not mean giving others free rein to use up the valuable time we have with our agencies. Although it may seem obvious, the absence of a clear procedure for managing questions and requests can result in misunderstandings, duplication and, ultimately, ineffective use of resources.

One way to avoid this would be to implement a simple protocol that opens a channel of communication between both parties, in which you are responsible for centralising, assessing and giving the green light (or not) to queries, and ensuring that internal teams are familiar with this system.

Joint preparation for crises

Developing a communication plan is a key step when starting a new project or beginning to work with an external communication team (or client, depending on the situation). However, this plan often does not include a section on potential risks, or contingency management is simply relegated to the internal team.

We must prepare ourselves together for crises, because it is precisely this preparation that ensures the best possible outcome if the worst ultimately happens. And we must do so without naivety: no sector, firm or professional is immune to crises, and although these may vary in nature and form, the way to mitigate their potential consequences is the same.

Spending time discussing the risks with your communications team, designing a joint strategy that assigns a defined role to each person, and scheduling regular meetings to review the plan’s validity can be a good way to prepare. In the best-case scenario, it will never have to be implemented and will have been a great practical exercise for everyone.

These notes are an invitation to take a step back and evaluate our relationship with our external communications team from a broader perspective. And, why not, as the year draws to a close, review whether there is anything we can improve for 2026. Don Draper would surely have fared better if he had done this exercise sixty years ago.

*Article written by Lourdes Marín, PR & Communications Manager at eToro.

La entrada Reflections on agency-client collaboration se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

There is bound to be resistance from some states, but reality is stubborn. We are moving decisively towards energy rationing; The war in Ukraine, and the decisions that have been taken with regard to Russia, are leading us into a very complex situation in the midst of galloping inflation (10.5% in August) accompanied by the European Central Bank’s decision to put on the emergency brake and stop the economy in its tracks by raising interest rates;

These decisions come after months of steep price rises that are blamed on the war but began much earlier, after the pandemic; A large part of the economic sectors and their value chains are suffering the harsh impact of stagflation that is already setting in;

Some effects

Electricity-intensive or semiconductor-dependent companies have started to shut down; And there we have steel and automobiles;

The food sector (from farmers and fishermen to transporters, distribution and small shops) is hard hit by the crisis; And why should we talk about citizens who are finding it increasingly difficult to fill their shopping baskets?

Against this backdrop, European institutions and the government are advocating price caps to the astonishment of employers; And with each passing day, the situation becomes more and more complicated;

The role of communication

When the crisis arrives, and it always does, there is one element that conditions the behaviour of those who suffer it: uncertainty; Not knowing what will happen to me, what will become of me and/or how long it will last; This lack of certainty, if not addressed in time, triggers rumours in the absence of certain, reliable and transparent information;

With rumours and uncertainty comes misinformation and fear; Let us also remember that the lie spreads 70 times faster than the truth through social networks What better breeding ground for polarisation, confrontation and the destruction of alliances! Because in a crisis you are only as resilient as the value chain you are part of;

This is where communication plays a decisive role in strengthening the value chain and with it the resilience of a sector; In fact, communication is the oil that greases the chain; Without fluid and transparent communication, within your organisation and between the essential links in the value chain, the value chain will eventually rust and break down;

The truth is that precisely when the cold weather arrives, it doesn’t seem the smartest thing to let your value chain rust. What are you doing to grease it?

* Article by Luis Serrano, managing director of Señor Lobo & Friends

La entrada In times of crisis grease your value chain se publicó primero en Agencia comma.